Skip to main content
Glama

livetennisapi-mcp

by io.github.livetennisapi
OverviewDiscussionsAdmin

API status and plan

check_api_status
Read-onlyIdempotent

Check whether the Live Tennis API is reachable and which plan the configured key is on. Use it to find out why other tools are refusing data. Works with no key.

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault

No arguments

Output Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
okYesTrue when the request succeeded, including when the answer is an empty list. False for a missing or rejected key, a plan that does not include this data, an unknown id, a rate limit or a network error. The message then says what to do. check_api_status is the exception: it is true whenever the API answered, and reports API key problems in the message.
tierNoDetected plan: FREE, BASIC, PRO or ULTRA. Null when no key is configured.
has_keyNoWhether a key was configured for this tool set.
messageYesHuman-readable summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim.
reachableNoTrue when the API answered its health check.
api_versionNoAPI version reported by the health check.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed4 schema fields changed
    • addedInput schema / additionalProperties
      Added value: +false
    • changedOutput schema / properties / has_key / description
      Previous value: -"Whether a key was supplied with this call."New value: +"Whether a key was configured for this tool set."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / message / description
      Previous value: -"Human-readable summary. Identical to the text content, so either half can be used alone."New value: +"Human-readable summary of the result, safe to relay to the user verbatim."
    • changedOutput schema / properties / ok / description
      Previous value: -"True when the call returned data. False for a tier wall, a missing or rejected key, or an empty result — all of which are normal states with a clear remedy, not failures."New value: +"True when the request succeeded, including when the answer is an empty list. False for a missing or rejected key, a plan that does not include this data, an unknown id, a rate limit or a network error. The message then says what to do. check_api_status is the exception: it is true whenever the API answered, and reports API key problems in the message."
  2. First observed

TDQS

A4.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnly, idempotent, non-destructive and open-world, so the description doesn't need to restate safety. It adds real value beyond that with 'Works with no key', telling the agent authentication is not a prerequisite, and by framing the result as a plan/health probe. It stops short of saying whether the check makes a network call that can be slow or rate-limited.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Three short sentences with no filler: what it checks, when to call it, and the no-key caveat. The primary purpose is front-loaded before the usage hint.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness5/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

An output schema exists, so the description needn't enumerate return fields, and annotations cover the safety profile. For a no-argument diagnostic tool, naming the two checks and the no-auth behavior is everything an agent needs to call it correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters4/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Zero parameters, so there is nothing for the description to disambiguate. Baseline 4 applies; the free-text does not need to discuss inputs at all.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and two concrete objects: reachability of the Live Tennis API and the plan tied to the configured key. That distinguishes it cleanly from every data-fetching sibling, none of which is a diagnostic tool.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines4/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

'Use it to find out why other tools are refusing data' gives an explicit decision rule for reaching for this tool over the siblings. No exclusion cases are stated, but for a unique diagnostic endpoint there is no obvious alternative to route against.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

All livetennisapi-mcp toolsInspect
Try in Browser
One endpoint for every MCP toolRayrun runs every MCP server behind one URL and holds the credentials. Each call is decided per client, tool, and argument, then recorded.ray.runAd

Glama MCP Gateway

Add one secure layer between your agents and this server.

Resources